I want to restate that this negativity is NOT in FIRST just about who built the robot (student, mentor, student/mentor). It exists in many other aspects of FIRST. This discussion has become about the disparity of resources between "powerhouse" and "other" teams, but that isn't what John's point is about. It's about correcting the behavior, and 1114 is just his example.
If it helps, I'll provide another example.
This year in NJ, 1089 was fortunate enough to finish in the Top 8. We had been scouted by several teams, and many more stopped by our pit both to lobby for us to pick them, and some to discuss picking us. When it came time for alliance selections, we knew the higher-seeded 2180 had intentions to pick us. BUT (while we have a great relationship with them) we also knew that the best alliance for our team did not include them. Politely, my alliance captain on the field declined the offer - and got booed for it.
We were lucky, however, to have Dave Lavery there doing alliance selections over the mic. He quickly explained that it was completely within our rights to choose to decline for any number of reasons, hushed the teams, then announced us as the #6 seed, citing "Well, now we know why they declined." My student was already
upset about having to decline 2180, and when he left the field with our alliance, he was clearly bothered by the crowd's reaction.
It wasn't the only incident we experienced in NJ this year, and we are certainly not a powerhouse team (yet). Several students on another team were accusing our team of "not deserving to be there" and "not building a good enough robot to be where we were seeded." Now, this didn't happen directly to our faces, but just a few rows behind us. The problem WAS addressed by the mentors on that team, and for that I thank them.
What I want to stress is that this can happen to ANY team in FIRST, and it shouldn't.